By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, February 22, 2007 at 2:18 PM
READ IT HERE FIRST Labels: Mayor, Schools, State_Senate
State Senator Jeff Smith today introduced a bill (Senate Bill 564) to allow St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay to sponsor new charter schools.
More later...
To learn more about the relationship between charter schools and their sponsors, see Section 160.400 of the Missouri Revised Statutes.
Currently charter schools can only be sponsored by:
Under existing law, the Mayor may request a sponsor to consider sponsoring a workplace charter school, which is defined as a charter school "with the ability to target prospective students whose parent or parents are employed in a business district".
Smith's bill, if passed, will apparently (the full text is not yet available online) simply allow the mayor to sponsor charter schools directly, effective August 28, 2007.
25 Comments:
Odd.
What does "sponsor" entail?
I will assume it means some direct authority.
Interesting that Slay will be in control of the private charter schools, whereas the State will be in control of the public ones. Suddenly SLPS enrollment drops due to a State failure, and many shift to charter schools. G Man is in control.
Well, this theory depends on what "sponsor" means.
2/22/2007 4:21 PM
Jeff Smith is showing his true colors. His not supporting Whitmore-Smith for the state education board only happended because he couldn't deal with the pressure that came down on him.
Now, he's trying to get into law a bill that lets Francis Slay create charter schools. Will the real Jeff Smith please stand up? Oh, pardon me, he did just show us who he is!
2/22/2007 4:30 PM
One term Jeff,wait for my next movie of how I only served 1 term.
2/22/2007 6:30 PM
I've always like Jeff personally, but being a good campaigner different than being a good legislator. Wish him well, but always seemed a little more of a lightweight than his reputation would lead one to believe. We should reserve judgment, but this move, while maybe predictable, I find unimpressive. He's always been Slay's guy tho so should not be a shock. No Jimmy Stewart here yet.
2/22/2007 10:29 PM
Has anyone else come up with a better idea? At least Jeff is actively searching for ways to improve the education of our children. The only thing I hear anyone else say around here is that a state takeover is bad and give SLPS one more year (again). That response does not help anyone, especially the students SLPS is supposed to serve. Thank you Jeff Smith for continuing to work for better public education.
2/22/2007 10:50 PM
re 10:50 pm anony--you're right, SLPS are shitty and something needs to be done. but guess what, charter schools don't do any better!
substituting one broken scheme for another doesn't fix anything, it just moves things around
2/22/2007 11:04 PM
Jeff Smith is all show and weak. He can't handle pressure. Make him and Nasheed on termers. Also, take Coleman out.
2/22/2007 11:11 PM
Bet Jeff Smith is stronger than Bill the Purd.
2/22/2007 11:15 PM
I highly doubt Jeff or Nasheed will be one termers. Doesnt the El AMins and Hubbard support outsourcing public education to private schools, didnt they serve multiple terms? The school failures start with the parents, until they get serious about education and actually voting in school board elections then something positive can happen. As of now its to little to late.
I still have yet to hear any type of plan besides lets wait and see. I dont support the State takeover but I dont have any answers either so its not much I can say to make a valid arguement as to why they should not takeover.
2/23/2007 1:38 AM
Maybe the State is beginning to back off of it's position. People are giving money to a group that is ready to file suit. Maybe Smith has tossed Slay a bone so that he does not look like a total loser again.
2/23/2007 7:15 AM
City charter schools are already drawing off thousands of public school students -- and their parents. Either the district will compete by offering more schools in which learning is possible, or the district will continue to lose students.
2/23/2007 9:34 AM
First of all, the move to disenfranchise the city voters is illegal and unconstitutional. Secondly, since everyone is insisting on facts--lets talk facts. Charter school results are in and the majority demonstrate a performance inferior to the public schools. Thirdly, we've seen what happened when medicine became privatized and an 'investment opportunity'--patients suffered worse fates than under the old non for profit model. In spite of these facts; Slay and his raiders insist on this course of action. This isn't about improving education for poor and minority children--it's about destroying the remnants of public education and using taxpayer funds to subsidize parochial schools, especially those operated by the Catholic Church. This has nothing to do with justice or accountability. If accountability were the issue--then Slay and his raiders would be held responsible. They were the ones that took the district from a mere two points away from full accreditation and made a series of decisions which dealt a crippling blow to an already overburdened district. Pair that with Slay's tax abatements for the wealthy and, of course the district is 'cash strapped.' Slay gave away the district's money without the district's consent. The district should sue Slay and his silent partners for RESTORATIVE FUNDING WITH INTEREST COMPOUNDED DAILY. THE DISTRICT SHOULD ALSO SUE THE STATE FOR WITHHOLDING MONIES MANDATED BY THE DESEG. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THEY SHOULD ALSO SUE THE STATE FOR DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES AS THE STATE OFFICIALS CONTINUALLY CHANGE THE RULES MID STREAM IN AN ARBITRARY, INCONSISTENT AND CAPRICIOUS MANNER. A NEW DESEG. LAWSUIT NEEDS TO BE FILED AGAINST THE STATE OF MO., THE CITY GOVERNMENT AND OTHER INVOLVED ENTITIES. STATE FILES SHOULD BE SUBPENOED AND CRIMINAL INDICTMENTS AGAINST STATE OFFICIALS AND SLAY SHOULD ENSUE. THAT WOULD BE ONLY THE BEGINNING. Wake up everyone. Our very democracy is in peril.
Gadfly
2/23/2007 9:44 AM
Typical of Jeff’s flip flopping on the Public Schools. During the election he was telling the teachers he was with them and would fight state take over and that they should ignore his charter school. To everyone else he was boosting about his charter school and saying that something needed to be done to fix the schools and that he was the guy to do it. (He toned it down a bit after his Confluence Academy charter school underperformed the rest of St. Louis city schools for the second year in a row.) He has to know the schools are broken and need something major but he is not willing to tick off the teachers’ union. At least Slay does what he believes in even if he is a bit heavy handed at times. Jeff will continue to screw this up. He waffled on Whitmore-Smith until the teachers’ union made it clear that they wouldn’t go for it and then he came out against her. He waffled on the state takeover until the teachers brought pressure. He knows something needs to be done but he is unwilling to do anything to jeopardize a future political career.
I also think his charter school will continue to come back to bite him. Two years underperforming the city schools. All groups at his school are underperforming their counterparts in the city schools. But he still takes contributions from Edison who makes money on his school. And they continue to expand Jeff’s charter school. Because of their success? Obviously not. Because Edison is making money and spreading it around? Well maybe.
2/23/2007 9:47 AM
Thirdly, we've seen what happened when medicine became privatized and an 'investment opportunity'--patients suffered worse fates than under the old non for profit model.
Got a link for that, beyond anecdotes of how messed up HMOs are.
2/23/2007 11:40 AM
To all you uninformed people who say there is no plan in the SLPS and we are just spinning wheels--HELLO!!!! Dr. Bourisaw has a plan, The Comprehensive School Improvement Plan, it's been made public, and the schools are improving. Nothing happens overnight, but I'm in the school every day where my kids go and Dr. Bourisaw has us on the right track. Everyone out there expecting instant results is crazy. But the change has started, and if the state messes it up the kids will suffer longer than they need to, that's the bottom line.
2/23/2007 12:22 PM
I'm all for debate. But, let's make sure we know what we are debating. Charter schools are not private. They are public schools that are released from the responsibilities of normal public school in return for some sort of accountability. So, people who talk about Jeff Smith or Mayor Slay wanting to privatize education through charter schools are incorrect. Sen. Smith is very clear about his belief that private school vouchers are unconsitutional.
2/23/2007 2:13 PM
Thanks to Doug for identifying himself. As for the rest of you, I don't think much of anonymous posts.
If you have something to say, sign your name to it.
2/23/2007 3:22 PM
Jim Hacking said...
Thanks to Doug for identifying himself. As for the rest of you, I don't think much of anonymous posts.
If you have something to say, sign your name to it.
2/23/2007 3:22 PM
What's the problem, Jim? Why isn't the content of each post enough?
2/24/2007 12:01 PM
Before you can implement any plan:
Begin with re-evaluating every student in the SLPS by looking at performance up till now. (No new testing is needed). Place every child in the appropriate grade level beginning next year. Do NOT allow social promotion. If a child has failed more than one year already, place that child in the appropriate grade level with others of the SAME AGE. (alternative settings)
Separate disruptive students into alternative settings with very low student-teacher ratios. (Get rid of inclusion for those students with behavior issues and give intensive 1-on-1 support instead)
Now you will have a CHANCE of implementing your School Improvement Plan.
The real question is not do we HAVE a plan, but is anybody willing to PAY for it?
2/24/2007 1:54 PM
The state is not backing off. They need close to 40K for their law suit. The state is not worried about the lawsuit diled by Purdy Downs and Jones. Board pack your bags you all are out and so is that awful superintendent that you put in.
2/24/2007 11:56 PM
As one of the union 420 people pointed out in an SOS OPEN posting, this will take further money from St. Louis Public Schools. The money will pay for county students to attend these city charter schools.
2/25/2007 11:30 PM
Anonymous 2/24/2007 11:56 PM said...
The state is not backing off. They need close to 40K for their law suit. The state is not worried about the lawsuit diled by Purdy Downs and Jones. Board pack your bags you all are out and so is that awful superintendent that you put in.
Do you have evidence to support this? How do you come to the conclusion that the State is not backing down?
2/26/2007 6:45 AM
Anonymous 2/25/2007 11:30 PM said...
As one of the union 420 people pointed out in an SOS OPEN posting, this will take further money from St. Louis Public Schools. The money will pay for county students to attend these city charter schools.
Huh? Why would a student come from the County to attend a charter school in the City?
2/26/2007 6:47 AM
County students cannot attend city charter schools. You can only attend a public school (which is the classification given charter schools) in your own municipality, unless deseg is involved.
2/28/2007 1:08 PM
To Anon 2/28/07 1:08 PM
The whole point of a work site charter school is to enable the child to attend school close to the parent. The whole point for setting up a work site charter in the city is to let the county resident family have the child be near dad or mom.
Not fair to have SLPS pay to educate an Illinois, U. City, etc., resident. Middle class has abandoned U. City schools even more than in St. Louis city.
2/28/2007 11:49 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home